Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 30, 2014 5:30am-6:01am PDT

5:30 am
and the response committed the them one violation of the conduct code subsection for failing to include a disclosure side our an hang and one conduct code subsection for failing to include a disclosure section type size on a door hanger and each commissioner who participated must certificate on the record that he or she personally reviewed the evidence or otherwise the entire procedures. commissioners so certificates. vice chair commissioner renne >> so certified. commissioner keane. i so certificate the respondent
5:31 am
is presumed to be innocent and subsequent hearing the executive director shall issue a statement for investigations for enforcement proceedings. at the regular meeting on the matter of ethics complaint you tell ethics commission made a desertion there's probable cause to building the following violations of the california government code was by the conduct code and the respondent melissa committed them one violation of the cool code for failing to file a campaign statement by the required deadline of january 31st and one violation of the government conduct code subsection a for failing to file a campaign
5:32 am
statement by the required city council of july 21st, 2012, and 3 the violation of the government code for failing to file a campaign statement by the required deadline of january 31st, 2013, and four one violation of the california government code subsection a for failing to file a campaign attempt by the required deadline of january 31st and 5 one violation of the government code section subsection a for failing to file a campaign statement of january 31st, 2014. each commissioner would participated in the discussion must certificate on the record they reviewed the buyer xeerdz >> commending. softly. commissioner hayon i certificate
5:33 am
as well. the respondent is presumed to be innocent in a sunset hearing the executive director should issue an accusation with the ethics commission regulars is for investigation and enforcements proceeding. finally in its regular commission of monday, june 23, 2014, in the matter of ethics commission complainant number 20 dash plus the ethics commission made a determination there's probable cause to building the following violations of the california government code as incorporated by the san francisco campaign of governmental conducted code occurred one violation of the california government code subsection a for failing to file a campaign statement 460 by the required deadline of january 31st, 2013, and one violation of the california code subsection a for failing to file
5:34 am
a campaign statement 460 by the required deadline of january 31st, 2014, each commissioner who participated must certificates on the records they've reviewed the entire procedures on the record. commissioner renne. commissioner hayon. i also certificate >> the respondent is is presumed to be innocent in a subsequent hearing the vice chair shall issue a regulation for the investigation and enforcement proceedings. >> agenda item 6. the commission voted in closed session not to disclose the closed session dlibsdz the
5:35 am
commission sought the advice of the attorney regarding the litigations in addition i wanted to raise one thing during the public comment prior to us moving into the closed session one person was giving a public comment subsequent as we were moving into closed session ms. johnson indicated to me should had not completed her public comment which the staff confirmed we asked ms. johnson to return to give her public comment but she declined and ms. johnson expressed to me that she found my response to be rude and for that i apologize ms. johnson. you need a motion on the session? that >> is there a motion to not
5:36 am
disclose the closed session dlibsz related to agenda item number 6? >> second. >> all in favor, say i. >> oh. commissioners director formal san francisco public government i don't understand the 4 cases 3 had to do with campaign violations and you couldn't write on the agenda those are campaign violations and the public will have some ideas what you were doing but that's too much to ask i don't know what the first case was but it was something you could have given a vague stipulation without compromising monlz anyone's rights frankly the harder you fight the more obstinate you get the reason you come to those
5:37 am
meetings and you see the few members of the public don't come because you make it obese by trups someone in the mid of their speak and have to come back and their frame of thought ms. johnson felt anger and she couldn't come back and express herself so your apologize is a day late and it's not to the person it should have been given >> the next item. >> oh, we have to move and didn't we all in favor, say i. opposed? hearing none, the motion passes the next item on the agenda is
5:38 am
the discussion and possible action sorry is yes discussion and possible action on the minutes. public comment? >> dan ray heart n for the san francisco open government those minutes are the reason i fought for the one hundred and 50 words summers in the minutes they pair down to nothing in parking lot from the denims from the public utilities public those are meaning less i get one sentence out of it you're not listening, in fact, those are a de facto of public sensorship if anyone buildings you'll off base i ask
5:39 am
people to speak for 3 minutes and read f the sum you'll not recognize it. see for user whether there's had anything representative in a meaningful fashion we're talking about constitutional political free speech. the protection of that free speech extends to its recommendation in the public record because it's been paid for that i public funds. this is particularly true when did free speech equalities for a petition of gruvenz ail the petitions have the basis in a petition for readdressing things we felt upper handing things unlawfully and dpw denigrated
5:40 am
the speakers the one thing you'll not take an action to change our kwauz you're just determined the public is not going to be involved in the public hearing and if the public has something to say you're not going to make an attempt to put it into the public record because you don't like what they say. you can deny it before and after but with you don't like what we have to say and as a result, you pay him to put in a couple of short sentences and sensor what we're putting in there not because we're not getting to say it because government censorship. that's what the library commission has done for years
5:41 am
and that's why i started to fight for the one hundred and 50 word summers because those things need to be on the record i'm sic and tired of people raising issues and saying oh, nobody said anything i can sit and look down at our desks shows the kind of district you people have >> comments on the minutes. is there a motion to approve the minutes from the may meeting marry second >> second. >> all in favor, say i. opposed? hearing none, the motion passes. the next item on the agenda is the discussion of the executive
5:42 am
director report >> just a couple of things i want to highlight. i did ask for and we will receive help from the controller's office on some of the audits that are pending. there there they're going to help us with a dozen audits that means by the end of this calendar year we'll be caught that's a first for us in a long time. so i think that's very good news we have a filing period of january 1st through june 30th. i would point out that the training that the f pc did for us we're very grateful that they took the time to come down here and do an all day tracing training with our staff we found it useful.
5:43 am
and you can see the director wants to turn this into a picture he felt it would be funny to see this swargs. we're going to be a little bit short on our revenue because of the revenue stream our revenue target is going to be 75 thousand dollars those are my highlights >> questions for the executive director relating to the executive director report? public comment? >> commissioners ray heart director of san francisco open government this is a generic one size fits all fits all nothing more or less each month i intend to go select one item to discuss
5:44 am
today, it's item 7. on statements of economic interests. for years city larger than lewis accepted thousands of dollars even if responsibilityable gifts from friends he go forward his fiduciary job expend by the fund from 2000 to 2013 if the public sees the screen the commissioners are busy doing busy work he did so well enforcing the oversight for the millions of dollars 0 raised by group and year after yes, he pursue go right ahead himself in a quick pro-kwo arrangement he utilized about accepting the gifts and look at it this other way where the if i understand
5:45 am
were going he abused his job to withhold public records that uncovers the it's in vision of the brown act and the public records act and the sunshine ordinance. member of the public end up having to do your job it's well, to sit around and use the right text size on a letter and crap as far as most of the san franciscans they don't care but you have a librarian taking a payoff from a group and letting them raise $60,000 and come before the public and represent he knows where this money went and the bottom line is after two solid years of public document requests it took a year to get a
5:46 am
what we needed to get to fine him and he got a good deal 5 thousand dollars a year worth ever hotel trips and he paid a $200 fine sign me up for that if i get caught i'll pay $200 and we f we asked you to look at it is you wouldn't do it we have to go to sacramento we do your job because you're too intent on co-sponsoring other people. that's exactly what happened when mr. sincroy did it while i was out of the state cover their butts. you can look as disgusted as you want to silence is gotten
5:47 am
>> items for future meetings pr any items that the commissioners want to propose for the future agenda. >> without necessarily conceding the merits of some of the argument made tonight i wonder and i'll ask the staff to look at this why we don't when we have these hearings on probable cause or a strimgs don't identify what the alleged violations are of what the statutory provisions of the code whatever it maybe so that the public would have some awareness ever what the subject matter is of the closed hearings. >> i agree if there's some way to put something general so people have some idea i think that makes sense that's
5:48 am
something we should be doing. along those lines at some point i'd like to take up the comments made by those two individuals appeared to have given been given faulty information at least that's what their allegations is so the question is you know how do we make sure that people who want to run for office are getting the proper information and is it a good idea i thought his idea of a check list it sounded reasonable i don't know how easy or not easy it is to do something like that or if it's respect to what we do
5:49 am
>> we talked about looking at the candidates. >> but also do you ever have concerns if people come in personally that all staff knows what to tell him in terms of filing dates and all the forms they all know what they need to tell the candidates. >> yes. >> so those two individuals there's misunderstanding. >> i don't know but the process is overwhelming for the first time candidates. >> i understand that. there are a number of filing requirements and at any given conversation, you know, small business could think they have everything and i'll tell you that from the form that they referenced is due very early so
5:50 am
it's unfortunate it's so early in the process >> because their excellent things to the staff to consider we should take up that for design. >> public comment? >> and i don't know how much more i can be clear the case from the sunshine oral systematically i'm specifically 62 to have a rehearing. you had a hearing made no effort to determine where i was not here i was a party of interest. and you can shake our head and do all this crap the bottom line if you went into a hearing and they held the hearing without letting you know and simply i'm not talking about sending out the notice i was out of the
5:51 am
state and didn't receive notice until i got back are you honestly going to sit there and look at it me and say i wouldn't have a problem with that. the reason i'm saying this during the hearing mr. herrera lied through emphasis teeth said it would take $40,000 for me to be allowed to put a slide on the librarian auditorium he can do the same thing they send send him a power point presentation and it didn't cost him a penny and, in fact, the sunshine task force especially asked him during the hearing if it's the case. they don't like what i have to say ii think you understand that feeling having they don't want
5:52 am
me to use the overlayed projector like the groups they like by the way, i will put up things that are easily disessential i spent 4 years teacher for the state of hawaii i can make a complete presentation and with graphics i'm killer. that's viewpoint discretion it's a violation of my fichlts and it was based on on mr. herrera's lies to the library commission which they bought with this argument they had to spent $40,000 for the slides up on the screen. now i don't know about you but i'm ticked off the way it was
5:53 am
handled i was denied due process. so frankly it was and i think the issue come down but i received notice i was 0 out of the state and can prove it. the second thing is whether i have the integrity to have a hearing and at least ask that the participant or involved parties be part of the hearing. >> is there a motion to adjourn the meeting so moved. second >> second. >> in favor. >> i. the meeting is adjourned.
5:54 am
>> i have 2 job titles. i'm manager of the tour program as well as i am the historyian of city hall. this building is multifaceted to say the very least it's a municipal building that operates the city and county of san francisco. this building was a dream that became a reality of a man by the name of james junior elected mayor of san francisco in 1912. he didn't have a city hall because it was destroyed in the
5:55 am
earth wake of 1906. construction began in april of 1913. in december 1915, the building was complete. it opened it's doors in january 1916. >> it's a wonderful experience to come to a building built like this. the building is built as a palace. not for a king or queen. it's built for all people. this building is beautiful art. those are architecture at the time when city hall was built, san francisco had an enormous french population. therefore building a palace in the art tradition is not unusual.
5:56 am
>> jimmie was an incredible individual he knew that san francisco had to regain it's place in the world. he decided to have the tallest dome built in the united states. it's now stands 307 feet 6 inches from the ground 40 feet taller than the united states capital. >> you could spend days going around the building and finding something new. the embellishment, the carvings, it represents commerce, navigation, all of the things that san francisco is famous for. >> the wood you see in the board of supervisor's chambers
5:57 am
is oak and all hand carved on site. interesting thing about the oak is there isn't anymore in the entire world. the floors in china was cleard and never replanted. if you look up at the seceiling you would believe that's hand kof carved out of wood and it is a cast plaster sealing and the only spanish design in an arts building. there are no records about how many people worked on this building. the workman who worked on this building did not all speak the same language. and what happened was the person working next to the other person
5:58 am
respected a skill a skill that was so wonderful that we have this masterpiece to show the world today.
5:59 am
6:00 am
>> good afternoon. welcome to the s